View Single Post
Old 10-11-2007, 01:25 AM   #9
Achilles
Dapper Chimp
 
Achilles's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 8,204
Helpful! Veteran Modder Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Galt
I don't think it ought to be a United States military force at all, unless the country that is being invaded presents (to quote Schenk v US) a "clear and present danger" to the US.
Agreed, however I do think that we should be willing to commit troops to U.N. endeavors, et cetera. I have supported the argument for avoiding foreign entanglements in the past and I don't wish to change my argument now. I do acknowledge that there are some cases in which it is immoral to stand by and let others abuse power though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Galt
Somewhat. I think a fairly substantial standing army is necessary for the purpose of readiness, and to carry out public works, disaster relief, etc. during peacetime. That being said, I think elements of each state's national guard(or non-incorporated militia) would better suit the peacetime needs of the individual states whilst maintaining an element of readiness. However, interstate peacetime tasks, such as establishing and maintaining the sanctity and security of our borders, would require a national force, which could also serve as the core around which larger wartime armies are built(as per historical precedent).
Did you just talk yourself out of a "substantial standing army"?

I think we're mostly on the same track here. I think we should have a fairly substantial National Guard/Coast Guard, but I don't think a standing army is necessary. We did just fine without one before the Cold War, so I don't really see why one is necessary after it has ended.

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Galt
Why not start now?
Because I think we might be past the point of drawing down gracefully. I hope we are not, but I fear that we are.

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Galt
Also, I don't think the Chinese state will be able to maintain itself in its current incarnation, depriving its citizens of their inalienable rights. Like most totalitarian states, Red China only prospers because of the sanction free nations composed of free men give it(wow, that came out far more Randist than I meant it to). I think we need to more closely investigate China's human rights abuses and call them out on the world stage, and implement tariffs and taxes on goods produced overseas, especially in nations with nondemocratic governments.
I guess we'll just have to wait and see. It is difficult to have capitalism without democracy. As capitalism continues to build momentum, I think democracy will follow suit. China opted for Communism out of necessity, I think they will make a similar change in ideology when the benefits of said change become similarly necessary/self-evident.

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Galt
Yes, and that bothers me, even though I am a fan of FN and H&K, I think the weapons systems employed by our armed forces should be designed and produced domestically, for the sake of national security in the event of war or other disaster. We really need to re-establish Springfield Armory as the nation's official R&D, design, and production center for our firearms, thereby internalizing the process of arming our soldiers(and eliminating firearms designed and produced by the lowest bidder), so that more of our servicemen and women come home alive.
Meh. My background with macroeconomics makes me wants to disagree, but I still see where you're coming from with regards to national security.
Achilles is offline   you may: quote & reply,